'Transablism' is now a thing?!

[mackerella]

Is this the logical conclusion of self-ID? Able-bodied people who identify as disabled are complaining that they are excluded from disabled communities and disability studies

mobile.twitter.com/PankhurstEM/status/1155275175161675776

As a parent of a disabled child (and the daughter of a disabled parent!) I can't even express how angry this is making me feel. But it may peak trans another few people?

Once it is set in law that someone's personal choice of protected characteristic must be equally respected and provided for as for those who have that protected characteristic, then trans age and trans ablism are an obvious next step, because how can one inner sense of self/right to be authentic self be legally valid despite all disadvantage to others but others aren't?

This

This is all lip service to exploitation of the most vulnerable of society. Taking resources from genuinely disabled people and trying to speak for them as individuals who will not be diagnosed disabled, is gross. I cannot imagine how it would be if white people suddenly wanted reparations for slavery of other people's black ancestors!

One thing I have noticed with activist communities is that they generate their own language that is not accepted by all the people they claim to represent.

This.

I am tired of "activists". I want statements based off science not emotive bullshit. No matter how anyone tries to dress this up, they are enabling predators to take away precious resource from disabled people and it is very wrong.

I do wonder who the posters are who have such a clear agenda not only in constantly trying to link disabled people with benefits scammers

Listen, I think some of the people who assess disability for benefits can be complete dicks. I have seen numerous articles where individuals who were terminal or otherwise were denied benefits and these decisions being overturned at tribunal. I agree this is completely wrong.

The other issue I have though is that if we open the dialogue to "self ID" we do open the conversation to predators. There are predators, just like in any other avenue in life and it is not "ableist" to say that. Prisons are full of people who cheat, scam, fraud, steal and rape other individuals. This is not an activist issue or a tumblrina past time to suddenly decide which words are OK or not, to say we are not susceptible to exploitation, when no one has given them the authority to speak on behalf of every disabled person. It's incredibly offensive. The resources are finite and need to be protected for people who have a disability and already struggle to get the help because of a lack of resource. I am in this boat and despite having children who have severe non-verbal autism, one with mobility issues, we are constantly fobbed off due to a lack of resource/funding for the NHS.

It's not that there is a rising trans disability lobby using the TRA arguments, but that the TRA arguments hijacked the language of the social model of disability, which pre-existed them. That doesn't mean the social model language is wrong, it means we need to be alive to it being misused (see also: "born that way" and "biological essentialism")

This may well be true. I have reservations about some of the language used in the social model even apart from comparing it to trans advocacy and did before that was a consideration.

Not that I think it was nefarious or anything like that. But I do question whether it is really a good idea to accept and promote the view that because someone doesn't "identify" as disabled, or any other term used to describe a situation in the law or for the purposes of communication, it's a good idea to find a way around using that term.

There is something to be said for clear communication on the one hand, but on the other realising that very often a usage simply won't always reflect the feelings an individual might have and can never really reflect the breadth of experience of everyone. We can still use those words about ourselves and accept that they aren't the whole of who we are.

I don't think anyone is trying to link disabled people to benefit scammers. I really can't see how that is being interpreted from what people are posting.

Honest to God if I had to compete for services for my severely disabled son with an able-bodied soul I'd probably lose my shit

Bigoted eh? Now who else uses that term to silence debate? 🤔

Maisel I think the arguments you're having are mostly with yourself and what you're imagining is being said here. You might want to try reading the thread a little more closely.

My last couple of posts were rather clumsily (and tipsily) expressed, but they were a critique of the way identity politics privileges those who shout the loudest about their marginality. Those with lived experience on the thread have more of a right to speak authoritatively about the issue. I fully agree with that. However I do not agree those people have higher status on the thread, and therefore can carte blanche accuse others of bullying and screaming, and misonterpret their comments, with impunity because they are some sort of sacred caste. We need to be able to discuss things clearly without tiptoeing on eggshells for fear you will be accused of an identity heresy or wrong think.
I mean, we have seen these things happen in forum after forum for women. To the point where people are afraid to give their opinion. Identity politics does not create democratic debate; it creates little Kings or top dogs with usually their own little clique of attack dogs (that has not happened here, but it could have).

It has been very interesting, as I said, to be exposed to the disability self-id perspective. I have seen frequent comments on various MN threads that those with invisible disabilities suffer greatly because they have the stigma of not having their disability acknowledged by wider society. I feel enormous compassion for these people.
But now having been faced with the same sort of shutting down one gets if one is gender critical, I have thought more deeply.
I think perhaps that those with invisible disabilities are not marginalised in the same way as someone who must rely on another to go to the toilet, or who faces the public stares with visible drools, who fears being shot by the police if they have another episode, who must struggle every day with a body they can't control.
Both have issues but they are distinct. For one of my latter examples to have to think about the emotional needs of someone who feels they need a diagnosis but can move independently, and therefore insist on "disability self-id", does not sit comfortably with me.
Someone who self-id's as autistic or cognitively impaired does not face the same set of struggles, the history of institutionalisation, early death, institutional violence. I imagine being told they need to centre and accommodate those who don't "pass" as disabled might set their teeth on edge.
And to refuse to discuss charlatans or pretenders because there is no "evidence" (even when there is) - I mean really, now I think the reason is because the identity politics activists want to assert their place in an already blurred, queered, co-opted definition.

@Deathgrip Using a wheelchair whilst being able to walk some does not make someone "transabled". Over 60% of wheelchair users use them for conditions that are not paralysis and can manage to walk some amount which may vary by the day.
Transableism is linked to devotees as well as transgenderism. It's highly offensive mockery of disabled people's pain and struggle combined with a bizarre fetishisation of that struggle. BBC did a documentary on devotees but didn't touch on when it starts turning into transabled nonsense.
As a disabled woman who uses a wheelchair, can walk a few steps and requires braces for non-working joints I get frequent disgusting DMs (on social media where I have photos of myself visible) from these people who see me as some kind of sex object. Disabled women's photos are stolen so that they can use them to create fake profiles to access groups and forums for disabled people for self gratification. Social media sites often refuse to help women whose images have been taken.

I’ve been thinking how to phrase this post, and thinking how to do it without using ablist phrasing - if I slip up, I apologise in advance.

As somebody with a fairly significant hearing impairment that does require adjustments but who doesn’t identify as disabled, my concern with self-ID is not about people accessing benefits - I a man well aware that the barrier to claiming is too high for that.

My concern is about people with really quite minor health issues who seek to speak on behalf of all disabled people - mostly people on Twitter, mostly people who appear, like TRAs, to have some sort of victim mentality where any disagreement on any topic (nothing to do with disability) is met with “Oh how very dare you, I’m disabled”. When the “disability” turns out to be self-diagnosed social anxiety, or in Lily Madigan’s case I think it’s mild dyslexia - yep, may well require adjustments at work, but doesn’t make you Teflon when discussing leftist politics, or standing for election.

My SIL is very prominent in Twitter as a disabled rights activist. Her disability is depression after the death of her mother. I sympathise, I have posted on here before that I had PTSD following a violent abduction, rape and attempted murder. I do not discount the impact of mental illness. But I’m not sure that having had depression in the past qualifies you to speak on behalf of all disabled people either, or take up speaking engagements, or set up an online shop selling t-shirts to “raise awareness”, where the profits go into your own back pocket.

She certainly identifies strongly as disabled. But I think she has found a lot of online support from having that identify, and it is hard to step back from it when it is such a central part of her life now. I wouldn’t describe her as transabled, she feels very strongly that she absolutely is disabled. But I’m concerned about the blurring of the boundaries and the erasure of the voices of people whose disability has a greater impact on their life.

I know there have been similar debates about people with self-diagnosed autism, particularly well-off white men with high tech incomes who are media savvy and interview well, shaping the discourse when people with more severe ASD (non-verbal etc) can’t contribute so eloquently/from such a position of privilege.

My concern is about people with really quite minor health issues who seek to speak on behalf of all disabled people

No wonder those of us attempting to speak up about needing plastic straws we got no support from the wider online disabled community.

No wonder those of us attempting to speak up about needing plastic straws we got no support from the wider online disabled community

Unfortunately adjustments for disabilities aren’t as sexy as environmental issues and never have been.

I haven't read the whole thread but I did read some extracts from the 'scholarly' article and was left utterly bamboozled.

Lesbians and gay men fight for measures to offset the homophobia they continue to suffer. Some straight people whine 'It's not fair! They're getting special treatment, and I'm excluded from it!' In the world of the upside down, this gets portrayed as lesbians and gay men having some sort of privilege denied to straight people.

Black people fight for measures to offset the racism they continue to suffer. Some white people whine 'It's not fair! They're getting special treatment, and I'm excluded from it!' In the world of the upside down, this gets portrayed as people of colour having some sort of privilege denied to white people.

Women fight for measures to offset the sexism they continue to suffer and to help with specifically female issues. Some men whine 'It's not fair! They're getting special treatment, and I'm excluded from it!' In the world of the upside down, this gets portrayed as women having some sort of privilege denied to men.

People with disabilities fight for measures to offset the discrimination they continue to suffer and to help with specific issues related to disability. Some people with no disabilities whine 'It's not fair! They're getting special treatment, and I'm excluded from it!' In the world of the upside down, this gets portrayed as people of colour having some sort of privilege denied to people with no disabilities.

Some people have to be the centre of attention. Some people have no imagination, no empathy, can't envisage what it would be like to be different from how they are. Some people are too selfish to be able to tolerate other people having things they can't have too, even when it's obvious why they can't have them, even when to qualify for these special measures would bring with it something the selfish person wouldn't want.

And then are the liars who just want to see if they can get away with an outrageous lie.

It's a grim old world.

Sashkin I can understand why you say you do not identify as disabled but would you say you are disabled? To me, deafness is clearly a disability. If I employed you I would want to know what was needed to overcome that disability and would be keen to ensure there were sufficient adjustments. But once these were in place your disability should cease to be relevant to your employment and hopefully you would no longer ‘identify as disabled’ within that environment - but you still would be disabled. You would still need those adjustments.

I have also seen similar to what you describe with autism; the loudest activists seem to have been diagnosed as adults. Indeed I attended a meeting recently where all the autistic people speaking had been diagnosed aged over 40. Several proclaimed how it was a ‘different ability not a disability’. I have also seen them heavily criticise parents/carers or the suggestion that families need support to cope with caring for individuals with autism. Yet those families can be at breaking point, younger children having to live with relatives because they are not safe, housing getting destroyed during meltdowns, never able to leave the house, severe lack of sleep, etc.

Birdsfoottrefoil because I am not completely deaf, grew up hearing normally (so not Deaf), and I have a set of probably ablist assumptions and prejudice about what it means to be “disabled”, so no I probably wouldn’t accept I was disabled. A lot of the adjustments are things I do myself, like positioning myself where I can lipread, and people often don’t realise until they talk to me from the wrong side and I completely ignore them. But I recognise that that is my pride, and that’s why I wouldn’t criticise SIL or others for having a different point of view of what disability is.

The autist thing you describe is exactly what I’m talking about! Of course it’s important not to stigmatise everyone with autism. But people with more disabling symptoms shouldn’t be shut out when they are the least able to advocate for themselves.

I worked for years with autistic people, long ago now. But I kept on following a few organisations/support groups in Facebook, often for parents
Most of them got absolutely battered by the new wave of self identified politicised 'autists' who came on and demanded the language etc be changed. They were exactly like TRAs. Many many parents left. Those parents had children with severe autism and they were bullied out by articulate aggressive identity activists who I seriously questioned has autism of any form. And there were plenty of them.

So yes, I'm wary around language demands made of me.
.

Who's, I missed your post birdfoot.
Glad others saw this happening.

*whoa

Yeah I find them difficult too (I have an ASD diagnosis).

In fairness it gets extremely tiring seeing parents of children who are just like you were lamenting that they were ever born and saying things like I hate autism and I can't wait for him to leave home, and it is tiring seeing autism used for inspiration porn, and it is tiring seeing parents filming their child's meltdown and putting it online for public pity / admiration, and it is tiring watching those parents refuse to accept any advice from autistic people. I see where the #actuallyautistic movement comes from and in principle it's not a bad idea.

However I have also seen in some groups self-identified autistic people who I'm not sure are autistic at all, behaving in exactly the way you describe. The ones I've noticed tend to be younger and also to self-identify as trans, bipolar, various PD's, all sorts. I know lots of NT parents of autistic children really struggle and they need constructive advice (because goodness knows they're not getting any from other services) not a torrent of abuse.

Of those who are diagnosed late, many carry trauma from being parented in the way that the Autism Moms want to keep doing (ABA, ridicule, punishments for meltdowns, grossly restricted diet or compelled eating, preventing stimming, compelling eye contact etc). I don't think they are necessarily helped to recover by being in those groups, and it explains, rather than excuses, the bullying.

LauraMipsum

Hmmm.... I have only very rarely seen the things you wrote about , and not for many years. And a lot of that was simply the era, and that lots of sometimes elderly parents were involved, all worried sick about their child once they, the parent, died.
The fact is, there is a massive difference between, say, your ASD diagnosis, and people who need 24 hour care for life.

Their need for support is way way higher.

It's Oppression Olympics.

I find the TRA situation basically the same.

Yes, I've seen the same thing in the autism community. I too can see where it is coming from, but ironically I suppose a lot of these individuals seem to struggle to see things from the perspective of those who are more severely impacted, or see it as anything other than a black and white issue. I suggested recently to a friend of mine that choosing to be a positive advocate for autism herself was not the same as telling other parents, who had different experiences, that they are doing it wrong, but she seemed to struggle to take in my point. And she is a late diagnosis autistic woman with a child who is a high functioning autistic.

I think the problem of activists claiming to speak for a whole community is a problem all round. I've seen it in the black community, the indigenous community, in feminism, the trans community, the gay community. Somehow the activists convince the general public, and perhaps themselves, they represent the view of the group. I know several members of the black community that have real problems with Black Lives Matter, for example, but you don't hear those voices in the public sphere, if you do they are dismissed as marginal, and if anyone who isn't black expresses a similar POV they are told they are not listening to the Black Voice and are bigots.

I have come to the conclusion that advocacy groups are not as useful as one might hope.

I think it's a very real danger.

I was having a workstation assessment, the report on which included having an insanely expensive chair, custom built to replace the knackered one that had no adjustable seat height, a broken back rest and one castor missing.

The purely coincidentally, I'm sure white, male employee who then kicked up such a fuss that he was disabled because he'd hurt his back once, hadn't been offered a Disabled Parking Space or an office near the Disabled Toilet/automatic doors and had to - gasp - sit in a chair that was only £600/less than three months old and walk to the men's toilet - resulted in the order never being placed as 'it wasn't fair to other people' (as I found out when I asked when my chair was arriving).

Apparently, despite going through Occupational Health and all the hoops, it's not discrimination if an employer decides they can't afford to implement the recommendations for such reasons as there is more than one disabled person on the staff.

Maybe he was terrified that his back would go out again I would have suggested that he stopped playing rugby each weekend and was effectively disabled by that. Maybe he believed he was disabled. Or maybe he wanted to feel special and make sure a disabled woman didn't get something he saw as being better.

But oh, how his little face lit up as he drove his car into the Disabled space and bounded up the stairs to his desk each morning.

Bloody hell. That's disability self-id.
I've seen Mumsnet referred to a few times as allowing ableism to run rife on the boards.
I now see this in the same context as Mumsnet's "transphobia" reputation. People who want to question disability self-id are labelled as ableists. It is verboten wrong think.